• In re WeWork Litig.

    Publication Date: 2020-09-02
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Real Estate
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Chancellor Bouchard
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: William B. Chandler III, Brad D. Sorrels, Lori W. Will, Lindsay Kwoka Faccenda, Leah E. Brenner, and Jeremy W. Gagas, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C., Wilmington, DE; Michael S. Sommer, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C., New York, NY; David J. Berger, Steven M. Guggenheim, and Dylan G. Savage, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C., Palo Alto, CA; William M. Lafferty, Kevin M. Coen, Sabrina M. Hendershot, and Sara Toscano, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Eric Seiler, Philippe Adler, and Mala Ahuja Harker, Friedman Kaplan Seiler & Adelman LLP, New York, NY; William Christopher Carmody, Shawn J. Rabin, and Arun Subramanian, Susman Godfrey L.L.P., New York, NY for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Robert S. Saunders and Sarah R. Martin, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Wilmington, DE; George A. Zimmerman, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, New York, NY; Elena C. Norman, Rolin P. Bissell, and Nicholas J. Rohrer, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Erik J. Olson, Morrison & Foerster LLP, Palo Alto, CA; James Bennett and Jordan Eth, Morrison & Foerster LLP, San Francisco, CA; Michael A. Barlow and E. Wade Houston, Abrams & Bayliss LLP, Wilmington, DE; John B. Quinn and Molly Stephens, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, Los Angeles, CA for defendants.

    Case Number: D69102

    Corporation could not bar specific directors from privileged information provided to the corporation as the director's management authority rendered it a joint client of the corporation and its board.

  • In re Coty Inc. Stockholder Litig.

    Publication Date: 2020-09-02
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: Consumer Products
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Chancellor Bouchard
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Ned Weinberger, Labaton Sucharow LLP, Wilmington, DE; John Vielandi and David MacIsaac, Labaton Sucharow LLP, New York, NY; Joel Friedlander, Jeffrey M. Gorris and Christopher P. Quinn, Friedlander & Gorris, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Jeremy S. Friedman and David F.E. Tejtel, Friedman Oster & Tejtel PLLC, Bedford Hills, NY; D. Seamus Kaskela, Kaskela Law LLC, Newtown Square, PA for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Kevin R. Shannon, J. Matthew Belger and Nicholas D. Mozal of Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wil-mington, DE; Gregory P. Williams, Raymond J. DiCamillo, Angela Lam and Kevin M. Regan, Richards Layton & Finger, P.A, Wilmington, DE; James W. Ducayet, Nilofer Umar, Benjamin Friedman and Zarine Alam, Sidley Austin LLP, Chicago, IL; Paul J. Lockwood, Alyssa S. O’Connell and Bonnie W. David, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Wilmington, DE; Lauren E. Aguiar, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, New York, NY; Patricia L. Enerio and Aaron M. Nelson, Heyman Enerio Gattuso & Hirzel LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendants and nominal defendant.

    Case Number: D69105

    Stockholder alleged sufficient facts to support their claims for breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty, so the court denied defendants' motion to dismiss.

  • In re MetLife, Inc. Derivative Litig.

    Publication Date: 2020-09-02
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: Insurance
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Kurt M. Heyman and Gillian L. Andrews, Heyman Enerio Gattuso & Hirzel LLP, Wilmington, DE; Gustavo F. Bruckner and Samuel J. Adams, Pomerantz LLP, New York, NY; Blake A. Bennett, Cooch and Taylor, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Lee Squitieri, Squitieri & Fearon, LLP, New York, NY; James S. Notis and Jennifer Sarnelli, Gardy & Notis, LLP, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Raymond J. DiCamillo and Brian S. Yu, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Maeve O’Connor, Elliot Greenfield, Michael W. Gramer and Catherine Walsh, Debevoise & Plimpton LLP, New York, NY for defendants and nominal defendant.

    Case Number: D69106

    Plaintiffs failed to demonstrate demand futility in this action for breach of fiduciary duty, so the court granted defendants' motion to dismiss.

  • Manti Holdings, LLC v. Authentix Acquisition Co., Inc.

    Publication Date: 2020-08-26
    Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: John L. Reed, Peter H. Kyle and Kelly L. Freund, DLA Piper LLP, Wilmington, DE for petitioners.
    for defendant: Samuel A. Nolen, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Andrew Hammond and Michelle Letourneau-Belock, White & Case LLP, New York, NY for respondent.

    Case Number: D69099

    Company was entitled to an award of attorney fees in this statutory appraisal action, and the court awarded petitioners interest from the date of the merger on the consideration for their shares.

  • Smash Franchise Partners v. Kanda Holdings, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2020-08-26
    Practice Area: Trade Secrets
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Laster
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Lauren Neal Bennet, Sarah P. Kaboly and D. McKinley Measley, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Tracy N. Betz and Neil Peluchette, Taft, Stettinius & Hollister LLP, Indianapolis, IN for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Michael F. Bonkowski and Andrew L. Cole, Cole Schotz P.C., Wilmington, DE; Steven K. Fedder, Fedder & Janofsky LLC, Baltimore, MD for defendants.

    Case Number: D69100

    Although plaintiffs were not entitled to an injunction shutting down defendants' business, the court granted a limited temporary injunction regarding certain statements made by defendants on their website.

  • Juul Labs, Inc. v. Grove

    Publication Date: 2020-08-26
    Practice Area: Corporate Entities
    Industry: Consumer Products
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Laster
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: William M. Lafferty, David J. Teklits and Lauren N. Bennett, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Bruce A. Ericson and Colin T. Kemp, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, San Francisco, CA for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Gregory V. Varallo, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, Wilmington, DE; David Wales and Thomas G. James, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, New York, NY; Francis A. Bottini, Jr. , Bottini & Bottini, Inc., La Jolla, CA for defendant.

    Case Number: D69098

    A stockholder was not entitled to request books and records pursuant to another state's laws, because the internal affairs doctrine provided that Delaware law governed inspection rights for companies incorporated in that state.

  • Menacker v. Overture, L.L.C.

    Publication Date: 2020-08-19
    Practice Area: Corporate Entities
    Industry: Entertainment and Leisure
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Laster
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Richard L. Abbot, Abbott Law Firm, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Michael A. Weidinger, Pinckney, Weidinger, Urban & Joyce LLC, Greenville, DEfor defendants.

    Case Number: D69089

    A former member of a limited liability company lacked standing to pursue a derivative claim for breach of fiduciary duty.

  • Nieves v. Insight Bldg. Co., LLC

    Publication Date: 2020-08-19
    Practice Area: Real Estate
    Industry: Construction
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Julia B. Klein, Klein, LLC, Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Curtis J. Crowther and William E. Gamgort, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Nicholas G. Kondraschow and William J. Rhodunda, Jr., Rhodunda, Williams & Kondraschow, Wilmington, DE for defendants.

    Case Number: D69090

    The court dismissed plaintiffs' claims for breach of fiduciary duty and piercing the corporate veil, but it deferred ruling on the motion to dismiss claims involving injunctive relief.

  • Fannin v. UMTH Land Dev. L.P.

    Publication Date: 2020-08-19
    Practice Area: Corporate Entities
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Fioravanti
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Robert J. Kriner, Jr. and Tiffany J. Cramer, Chimicles Schwartz Kriner & Donaldson-Smith LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Steven L. Caponi, K&L Gates LLP, Wilmington, DE; John W. Rotunno, Paul J. Walsen, Joseph C. Wylie II, Molly K. McGinley, Matthew A. Alvis, K&L Gates LLP, Chicago, IL; Myron T. Steele, Timothy R. Dudderar, Jacqueline A. Rogers, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendants.

    Case Number: D69086

    Court declined to dismiss breach of fiduciary duty claims where general partner and controller affiliates had not removed fiduciary duties from the partnership agreement and where plaintiffs were entitled to rely on disclosures related to challenged transactions and thus were not on inquiry notice of their claims.

  • Agspring Holdco, LLC v. NGP X US Holdings, L.P.

    Publication Date: 2020-08-12
    Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: Agriculture
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Chancellor Bouchard
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Joseph C. Schoell, Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jane E. Maschka, Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP, Minneapolis, MN; Jacob D. Bylund and David W. Creasey, Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP, Des Moines, IA, for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: James M. Yoch, Jr. and Kevin P. Rickert, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Michael C. Holmes, Melissa L. James, R. Kent Piacenti, Meredith S. Jeanes, and Jared D. Wilkinson, Vinson & Elkins LLP, Dallas, TX; Corinne Elise Amato and Eric J. Juray, Prickett, Jones & Elliott, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Todd W. Ruskamp and Daniel J. Schwaller, Shook, Hardy & Bacon L.L.P., Kansas City, MO for defendants.

    Case Number: D69078

    Court declined to dismiss fraud claim arising from corporate acquisition where defendants allegedly affirmatively concealed information demonstrating the material falsity of their representations, rendering plaintiffs' claim timely under the doctrine of tolling, and where defendants had caused damage by concealing the financial distress of the company.